I believe the panels are completely different between the two. If you bought it through Amazon why not return it and get an ST50?

The poster says they already did get the ST50, that they went to get theST30 but clicked on the link for the "newer model" saw the same price and got it instead figuring it would be better. So they are saying the ST50 is dim.

The poster says they already did get the ST50, that they went to get theST30 but clicked on the link for the "newer model" saw the same price and got it instead figuring it would be better. So they are saying the ST50 is dim.

I don't think there is clear information indicating that they are different panels. The UT50 clearly lacks the infinite black filter, and the ST50 may have somewhat different drive characteristics, but light output should be very similar, although there are no reviews out to verify this. At least one poster has pictures up of the UT50 next to a ST30 in store-light conditions and the UT50 is significantly brighter, supporting the possibility that the UT50 shares the same panel redesign as the rest of the lineup.

I'm new to all this, and possibly did something stupid, but bear with me. In Consumer Reports, I saw that the Panasonic VIERA TC-P42ST30 was a recommended buy, and had rave reviews on the picture: color, brightness, vividness, gorgeous, etc. I also had read (and I can't remember where), that the pricing on big ticket items was changing, and that beginning in April, MSRP's were going to be "enforced" by the manufacturer's so that brick and mortar stores pricing would be more competitive with e retailers, and that if you wanted to buy you should do so before April. (April fools?) I was out of the country 'til March 30, so when I got back and found a P42ST30 on Amazon for $719, I decided to take the plunge (sight unseen...I know, I know). When I clicked the link, no st30's were available, but it said "there is a newer model of this TV", same price, and the link took me to the P42UT50. Great, newer model, must have all the same advantages and then some (including the "brightness dimming" that had apparently been an issue with the st30), right? Bought it...it's here, and I'm just flabbergasted by the dimness of the picture. Granted, I'm watching SD programming mostly, and the HD movies etc. I stream thru Netflix are much better, but can't believe that after all the oohs and ahs over the brilliance of the picture described by CR and many other ST30 owners, that this is the same TV (of course, it's not...UT,not ST, but could it really be that different?). This is the first non-CRT I've owned, and don't buy TV's that often, so don't have much to compare it to, but am SERIOUSLY disappointed in the picture's brightness. Everything else seems to be OK, nice colors and black levels, etc, but SO dim. And that's with both the Brightness and Contrast cranked up to 100. So, I don't know if that's just the way plasma's are, or if I got a lemon, or if it's the difference between an ST and a UT, (no infinite black) or or? Know I should have never bought sight unseen, but have ALWAYS been able to trust CR and can't believe that this TV could have been the one they were referring to with their superlative adjectives describing it's picture. Anyone else out there have a 42UT50, or any UT50, and have any similar disappointments, or am I just crazy/stupid/unlucky? (Alright, I know what I did was stupid). Really don't want to have to return it via UPS, etc., but am extremely disappointed. Any fixes thru level adjustments, or any comments advice, commiseration, beration? Thanks.

I don't think there is clear information indicating that they are different panels. The UT50 clearly lacks the infinite black filter, and the ST50 may have somewhat different drive characteristics, but light output should be very similar, although there are no reviews out to verify this. At least one poster has pictures up of the UT50 next to a ST30 in store-light conditions and the UT50 is significantly brighter, supporting the possibility that the UT50 shares the same panel redesign as the rest of the lineup.

Are you sure about that? I could definitely be wrong but I thought when I read last year (helping my inlaws get a set) that the UT line and the ST line were significantly different in the way they produced the picture? You could be onto something with the different drive technology though.

I'm new to all this, and possibly did something stupid, but bear with me. In Consumer Reports, I saw that the Panasonic VIERA TC-P42ST30 was a recommended buy, and had rave reviews on the picture: color, brightness, vividness, gorgeous, etc. I also had read (and I can't remember where)

The ST30 was widely regarded as "the best bang for the buck" for most of 2011 and performed almost as well as the flagship models from Samsung and Panasonic. Four of my friends have ST30s and they all love it.

Quote:

When I clicked the link, no st30's were available, but it said "there is a newer model of this TV", same price, and the link took me to the P42UT50. Great, newer model, must have all the same advantages and then some (including the "brightness dimming" that had apparently been an issue with the st30), right?

Nope. The UT50 is not a newer model of the ST30, the ST50 is the newer model of the ST30. The UT series is an entry level model and is a big step down from an ST50. The ST series has a superior panel module, more picture adjustability including a screen brightness setting, and an AR Filter. UT50 lacks these.

Quote:

Bought it...it's here..I'm just flabbergasted by the dimness of the picture. Granted, I'm watching SD programming mostly, and the HD movies etc. I stream thru Netflix are much better, but can't believe that after all the oohs and ahs over the brilliance of the picture described by CR and many other ST30 owners, that this is the same TV (of course, it's not...UT,not ST, but could it really be that different?).

Yes it's that different. But early reports from some UT50 owners here on AVS are positive about the TV and it should be plenty bright enough, unless someone has an abnormally high expectation of how bright a TV should be. The one i played with at Fry's was plenty bright enough, but i hate the super-reflective screen (it doesn't have an AR Filter).

Quote:

This is the first non-CRT I've owned, and don't buy TV's that often, so don't have much to compare it to, but am SERIOUSLY disappointed in the picture's brightness. Everything else seems to be OK, nice colors and black levels, etc, but SO dim. And that's with both the Brightness and Contrast cranked up to 100.

You didn't say what Picture Mode you have the TV in. Is it still in Standard mode by any chance? Standard is the default mode to help the TV get Energy Star ratings and is too dim. Nobody uses Standard.

Have you tried the Custom mode yet ? And setting the Brightness to 100 is totally wrong, and the 100 Contrast setting is too high too. Contrast adjusts the overall screen brightness, and the Brightness adjusts the black levels. Setting the Brightness too high washes the TV out and ruins contrast.

Quote:

So, I don't know if that's just the way plasma's are, or if I got a lemon, or if it's the difference between an ST and a UT, (no infinite black) or or?

It's more likely your incorrect settings as well as your poor source. For now, put the TV in Custom mode, then try maybe 90+ Contrast to get the screen brighter, then set the Brightness to around 50. Go into the additional settings and set Black Level to Light, and HD Size to 2, and temp to maybe Warm 1. Turn the Brightness setting down until you can no longer see details on black items like the pinstripes or buttonholes on a news anchorman's black suit, then bump it up a click or two until it looks right. Adjust the color and tint to your taste. Tweak everything as neccessary.

Are you sure about that? I could definitely be wrong but I thought when I read last year (helping my inlaws get a set) that the UT line and the ST line were significantly different in the way they produced the picture? You could be onto something with the different drive technology though.

No I'm not sure about it, because Panasonic's spec sheets are marketing materials aimed to upsell the more expensive sets.

I don't think the Panasonic UT50 uses a different panel than the ST50 for the reasons outlined below:

The G15 NeoPlasma panel is stated as employed in the high and mid end products (ST50 up). The greatest expense associated with the development of a plasma panel is probably the design and manufacture of the phosphors & cell cavities (along with the correct power delivery characteristics, which should be determined by the tolerances of the phosphor and the geometry/materials used in the cell). These are also the aspects that dictate the major performance characteristics. Therefore any significant changes to the G15 NeoPlasma panel design would require a redesign of these components, or recycling of older panels. Panasonic has stated that the UT50 employs the same faster phosphors used by the ST50 and above, and these panels have been demonstrated as having significantly higher brightness than the ST30's at the same brightness settings, suggesting that both the phosphors and cells have been conserved across the lineup, and that the UT50 is not re-using 2011 panels.

Replicating the same features (phosphors and cells structure) across two separate panel designs would seem an unnecessary waste of resources, since the additional cost provides no differentiation benefits across these features, and takes away production capacity from the models your advertising focuses on. Special designs for low-end models usually do not happen without the use of modular production, by including units in the high-performance part that are disabled in the low-end models, allowing one to use scrapped high-end parts to increasing manufacturing efficiency. Semiconductor companies often use this production model. This requires modular components, which plasma panels do not have, unless you're talking about some characteristics of the power delivery system, software, and any additions (like light filters, AG coatings) employed.

Therefore I doubt the upstream features affect major performance aspects in a dramatic way (brightness, phosphor decay, basal excitement level), as these components seem to set by the characteristics of the phosphors, and the design of the cells holding them. It is likely therefore that the upgrades afforded to higher end models would be those that can be added on top of the foundation created by the G15 panel shared across the U50/ST50/GT50/VT50, like black filters, additional cpus, and software features.

Of course Panasonic could take a 2012 model and just arbitrarily impose some performance limitations to help sell the higher end models. I doubt they would cripple contrast much, given the competitive pressure around the ~1100USD price point. They certainly wouldn't degrade motion handling or brightness, so unless Panasonic decided to artificially restrict black levels beyond last year's ST30/S30 (~.008-.02 fl, doubtful because the price point directly intersects the ST30), there isn't much reason to be concerned with the performance of the UT50.

edit: Lastly, it seems probable that black level improvements afforded by tweaks to the G15 panel will come at some expense, since contrast performance should be a characteristic limited by the cell/phosphor design, which if true would make the decrease of pre-discharge emittence zero-sum with some other aspect of emittence. It's possible that something like the VT50 really does have lower minimum light output, but if it does I wonder if peak brightness or phosphor response times are affected. These may be non-issues, but I would be curious to see how the VT50 achieves lower black levels in a dark environment (if it does at all).

No I'm not sure about it, because Panasonic's spec sheets are marketing materials aimed to upsell the more expensive sets.

I don't think the Panasonic UT50 uses a different panel than the ST50 for a few reasons.
1) The G15 panel is employed in the high and mid end products (up to ST50). Any significant changes to this panel design are going to be costly to produce and manufacture, taking away resources for the heavily advertised products, so if you're going to do this you want to make sure your modifications are cheap to employ. This requires modular components, which plasma panels do not have, unless you're talking about some characteristics of the power delivery system, software, and any additions (like light filters, AG coatings) employed. So if you're going to make a separate product design, you'll do it for big-volume, highly advertised products, not the low-end, (likely) low-margin bargain hunter models.

2) The G15 panel employed on the UT50 retains many of the same characteristics as the higher end models. This includes the redesign that enables higher brightness levels and faster decay speeds (which may factor in to 2500ffd, although that seems at least partially a software enhancement). These are the components that Panasonic has stated to be dependent on the new phosphors and cells employed in the 2012 NeoPlasma.

I doubt the upstream features affect major performance aspects in a dramatic way (brightness, phosphor decay, basal excitement level), as these components seem to set by the characteristics of the phosphors, and the design of the cells holding them. Since we know the phosphors are the same across UT50/ST50 and up, the cells holding them are also likely the same (otherwise you would need to create two designs for the same phosphor, waste of money). Most of the feature additions should be anything that can be added on top of the foundation, like black filters, and software.

Of course Panasonic could take a 2012 model and just arbitrarily put some limitations to help sell the higher end models. The only reason I could see for them not to do this would be competitive pressure around the ~1100USD price point. It certainly wouldn't be motion handling or brightness, so unless Panasonic decided to artificially restrict black levels beyond last years ST30/S30 (~.008-.02 fl, doubtful because the price point directly intersects the ST30), there isn't much reason to be concerned with the performance of the UT50.

I've been wondering how different the viewing experience might be between the ST50 and the UT50. It seems to me that it is possible that the only difference might be very similar to comparing the GT30 and the VT30, FBr not considered, since the UT's filter is very much like that of the GT30 and it's been said that the ST50 is similar to the VT30.

I've been wondering how different the viewing experience might be between the ST50 and the UT50. It seems to me that it is possible that the only difference might be very similar to comparing the GT30 and the VT30, FBr not considered, since the UT's filter is very much like that of the GT30 and it's been said that the ST50 is similar to the VT30.

I'd be surprised if it's substantial. Still, the "U" series has traditionally been last-years tech so it's hard to say. No one seems to want to post anything about the UT50 and reviewers seem to be avoiding it as a big-box-store special. The S30 I ended up with got the same treatment last year despite several respected reviewers pointing out that it was essentially a feature stripped ST with 9/10s of the PQ.

I wish they still made an S panel... An S50 which, like last year, would be an ST50 quality picture and chassis with all the extraneous nonsense omitted. Some people want apps and 3d and all that crap but I just want a monitor.

"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love."

I've been wondering how different the viewing experience might be between the ST50 and the UT50. It seems to me that it is possible that the only difference might be very similar to comparing the GT30 and the VT30, FBr not considered, since the UT's filter is very much like that of the GT30 and it's been said that the ST50 is similar to the VT30.

By Filter are you talking about the Anti-Reflective Louver Filter found on the ST/GT/VT? The UT50 does not have one and is reflective like a mirror.

By Filter are you talking about the Anti-Reflective Louver Filter found on the ST/GT/VT? The UT50 does not have one and is reflective like a mirror.

Stealth edit: Some attenuation of reflected light on the UT50 is visible, but reflections are not blue shifted, suggesting no AR. I'm puzzled as to why Panasonic would want to forego the AR coating on these sets; they must really need to differentiate between this and the ST50.

What it does not have is that infinite black filter; the visible portion of the panel is a dark grey in daylight.

I think you should be careful with the information you post. People probably take you as an authority, so your information should be accurate. I have one sitting in front of me and it definitely has an AR treatment. Regular glass does not phase-shift white light to blue, AR does, and the UT displays this behavior.

What it does not have is that infinite black filter; the visible portion of the panel is a dark grey in daylight.

Of course that doesn't preclude the UT50 from having a lower-end AR treatment than the ST50 and above.

That's what I heard and that's what I thought I saw at BB. However, the panel was situated above my head. It didn't look like a mirror from that position either. Our BB isn't overly bright though.

That's what I heard and that's what I thought I saw at BB. However, the panel was situated above my head. It didn't look like a mirror from that position either. Our BB isn't overly bright though.

Actually I think I'm wrong. There is definitely some attenuation, but it isn't blue shifted. So either no AR coating and the panel is absorbing the rest of the light, or there is some AR coating, but cheap. It is certainly a pretty reflective panel, does not look to be tolerant of direct light sources.

I'm puzzled as to why Panasonic would want to forego the AR coating on these sets; they must really need to differentiate between this and the ST50.

They forego it to save cost and make the TV more competitive in the entry level market. It's an expensive process to apply the AR coating to the glass so they save a lot of money. And their competition is also eliminating the AR Filter on lower models so they have to be competitive, and we all lose.

Glossy reflective screens have been getting more and more common on Plasmas and LCDs (and even on laptop computers) the last few years and i'm afraid of it becoming more prevalent in the future. I returned a nice new laptop because i couldn't see the screen in the daytime, and i recently bought a small LED LCD TV that has a reflective screen and it's very irritating to watch during the day or with the lights on.

I think it is important to note there is a UT50 (1080p 42" thru 60") AND a U50 (1080p 50" only) series. The U50 is priced like the 42UT50 and seems to be a bare bones model (no 3D even), so there is a lower model. I wonder if anyone is going to check that one out, I know some people were looking for a no frills set.

The UT50 is 3D capable and the low end models from 2011 were not. If it is an updated 2011 model (I doubt it), it would make sense that it is an ST30 or above which would still make it worth looking into.